Looking at our next year's budget for new machines and spec'ing out new workstations.
I noticed that the Fermi cards are not listed in the "supported drivers" area of the Solidworks support area - has anyone done any testing with Fermis in SLI mode (GTX 470's) (X58 Chipset)?
or ATI FirePro's (V5800's) in CrossFire mode (890FX chipset)?
Thanks.
Bummer about no SLI / Crossfire support - the Engineers here have been complaining about the "slowness" of the Quadro FX3800's and I was looking for a more cost-effective alternative.
Looks like I'll be looking at a AMD 6 core . .
A better bet would be to look at a Core i7. They are faster than any of AMD's current offerings. Also, SolidWorks, for the most part, is single threaded operations. So your best bet is getting the fastest processor, not one with many cores. The Core i7's are currently significantly faster than any AMD offerings, so that is where I would suggest going if your engineers need the speed.
Exactly what kind of "slowness" are they experiencing that they blame it on their video cards? What size assemblies do you work with? Do you work with complex shapes (curves, surfacing tools, mold design, etc), or mostly prismatic parts?
Edit : I see Charles posted much the same thing but I'll leave my post
There will probably be some Quadro cards out in a a few months based on Fermi.
Probably they will be say 20-25% faster but relatively quite expensive this time..
Typically the Geforce cards are nobbled for performance with apps like SW - posssibly only 25% as fast as the Quadro based on the same chips.
The drivers are not optimised for SW use either. I would stay with a Quadro of some sort.
BTW cg folks have been complaining about pretty poor 470/480 performance with 3DMax etc - almost at 8800 level - but it *might* be the drivers.
The 3800 ought to be a fairly strong card. Is this for very large assemblies? You can probably turn down some graphics options in SW to gain more performance.
There is always a 4800 or 5800 but these are expensive and perhaps only a tiny bit faster = not worth it.
Perhaps they are not complaining about the graphics slowness as such but other performance issues?
Could you work with subassys rather than load everything for instance?
SW uses mostly 1-2 cores unless you are rendering or such.
A 6 core machine wont really help with modelling.
<gulp> I'm not liking statements like:
"CPU Bound"
"Single Threaded"
I've come from a Corporate Data Center / Server background and haven't heard those terms in 4-5 years. I guess I'll have to re-think how I'm going to satisfy these guys.
I thought I'd be leveraging my extensive gaming experience in developing workstations
I use a ATI 4870 at home and AMD CPU, my benchmarks are just as good as the overpriced i7 intels, but I do lose one thing with the "gamer" video card......RealView. It is not missed as I do not feel it is important for my CAD files to look "real".
Important is being able to have a fast machine and files I can send to the part makers that they can use.............to "look real" is fluff...........
You know I was thinking this thread just begs to have someone pop up and say their xxx gaming card is great, despite the good advice given to stay with a Quadro or Fire, and here it is.
Care to share those benchmark results with us? So what do you use at work and why?
Would you recommend that he should buy a 4870 instead of his 3800?
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pz7wTpIkC7LA28ybEyxyTPw My system is under Juergen T in the orangish color rows.
At work I have Dell Presision 690 with 160 GB SSD, FX1800 Nividia, it is slower than my home system.
I do like the FX1800, but it cost twice the amount of two 4870 X2's or one HD5890. Only difference is the FX1800 will allow realview to work............big deal.
I always find it funny that some say SW is all CPU...............if this were true why does the video card even matter?
...overclocked at 5.1 ghz for 76 secs...give me a break!...if my Duo could o/c that far it would be doing <50 secs - it does 67s btw
how are you going to compete with an i7 at 48 secs? no wait, I have it, that needs... 8 ghz!
Hey I'm just being difficult and combative
I think though Intel has the upper hand performance wise presently...
SW is calculation intensive and therefore the processor is what counts most, but it also benefits from a decent graphics card that wont give you driver/display issues.
BTW that rig you have at home is nice, it must be great for gaming and its not so bad for SW either
Thanks, it is nice.............but it does require massive maintenance. Water cooling allows the over clocking at that speed, water cooling is also a big pain.
Always have to make sure it is full (I have no idea where the water goes, but it evaporates). Any dust in the fans / filters / radiator fins and heat goes up. Water pumps do not last forvever, and when one fails it has a tendancy to melt down. 8 fans at full tilt are noisy, but the headphones help with that........LOL
Since I ran that benchmark I have upgraded to Win 7, added a SSD drive for the OS, and now run and ATI HD5890 video card. I have also added a peltier cooler to chill the water even more, this has helped keeping the fans RPM down (less noise) and keeps the overall water temp at 41 C (used to run at 55 C). Drawback on the peltier, 30 amps at 12 Vdc.................
Would I recommend this system as a SW machine, honestly no. It is too much work for the average guy to build and run...............but it does prove a Gaming system can work for SW. BTW, my Laptop is a ATI / AMD Gamer system as well, it runs SW at the same speed as my work computer....but no real view.
No, you will not be able to leverage what you know for gaming to a CAD workstation. The data types used are very different animals.
CAD data is nurbs and vector based, mathmatically render on screen and in the data set very accurately.
Game data is polygon/mesh based. Doesn't need to be as accurate.
What is needed to calculate the model and data structures are very different. Errors are acceptable in game data, not in CAD data.
You need to understand what exactly your engineers mean by slow. Then give us an update back here on what they say. Then we can help.
We also need to know exactly the types of work you do with cad, size of file and parts/assemblies, are they big data sets with lots of facets. Do you do FEA and Rendering or more core SolidWorks functions.
Do you currently use x32 or x64 bit systems. Windows XP, Vista or Windows 7.
Are the guys running out of memory if they are working on x32 bit OS.
What is your current typical workstation hardware details your guys are working on.
What version and SP of SolidWorks.
This type of detail will allow us to help you make better decisions on the choice of CAD station.
CPU is king with SolidWorks and most all CAD systems. The gpu is a minor player in performance.
Cheers,
Anna
Anna Wood wrote:
No, you will not be able to leverage what you know for gaming to a CAD workstation. The data types used are very different animals.
CAD data is nurbs and vector based, mathmatically render on screen and in the data set very accurately.
Game data is polygon/mesh based. Doesn't need to be as accurate.
What is needed to calculate the model and data structures are very different. Errors are acceptable in game data, not in CAD data.
CPU is king with SolidWorks and most all CAD systems. The gpu is a minor player in performance.
Cheers,
Anna
What? Where do you guys come up with this mis-information ............SW files sent out to vendor, customers, etc. are still the exact same thing wether it be a Gamer or workstation.
The program that is running will determine what the CPU is processing, CAD as data Non Uniform Rational Basis Spline (nurbs) and vector based or if you are playing a game it will be polygon/mesh based. You can play games on a work station (with reduced frames per second, a.k.a FPS) just as you can run SW on a gamer machine.........
The calculations will be correct in the data, no errors will be created just because it is a gamer machine. Why, because a gamer machine or a workstation use the same CPU's be it Intel i7 or AMD 965, mother boards can be the same, RAM is the same, HD's are the same, every component in a "machine" can be or is the same EXCEPT..........Gamers use Gamer cards and workstations use workstation cards.
Basically the main difference between workstation cards and gamming cards are the drivers. Workstation cards have different drivers to run the vector based graphics for static (no motion) rendering, gamer cards have drivers that run the polygon/mesh based data to give faster rendering speed needed for on screen motion. Gamers need cards that can supply a fast FPS rating, workstations do not need fast FPS. What you see "on screen" will not even be noticeable, put a gamer system and a workstation on the same desk with the exact same SW model on screen with RealView off and tell me honestly if you can see a difference.
So the extra cash (they can cost over twice as much for a workstation card vs a gamer card with the same specs) is for different driver's. Why spend it if all we loose is RealView in SW.
IMHO, the only reason to defend the use of a workstation is to justify to your boss why you had to spend so much more money to have the use of RealView.
Video cards do not effect rebuild times, so any benchmark will not reflect that.
Your video card does not render NURBS in SolidWorks, nor does it render a mesh model in Rhino. They are both converted to facets before being sent to your video card. That's what the Tools>Options>Document Properties>Image Quality slider does. It adjusts the resolution of the facet conversion from the NURB data.
This video is quite a bit outdated now, but I think it gets one of the points across. The new FirePro v3800 is $119, which is the latest generation of the video card shown in the above video.
Charles Culp wrote:
Video cards do not effect rebuild times, so any benchmark will not reflect that.
Your video card does not render NURBS in SolidWorks, nor does it render a mesh model in Rhino. They are both converted to facets before being sent to your video card. That's what the Tools>Options>Document Properties>Image Quality slider does. It adjusts the resolution of the facet conversion from the NURB data.
I never said it did, matter of fact I said "The program that is running will determine what the CPU is processing, CAD as data Non Uniform Rational Basis Spline (nurbs) and vector based or if you are playing a game it will be polygon/mesh based."
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/opengl-workstation-graphics,1269.html explains a little about the differences between a workstation card or a gamer card.
I might be worth mentioning that with a little work you can make some gamer cards think they are a workstation card so you can use workstation drivers. See http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=105&pgno=0 for example.
As to the video you gave us to watch................how many of you have to spin a model around like that in real life.............
In Chris' defense of using AMD and overclocking, it may have some merit. Eventually I hope to hook a CPU water cooler into a geothermal system to help heat my house...
Seriously though, as an experiment the AMD processors do have some merit. AMD (Asus?) offered a Cool n Quiet option that would slow the processor speed down to 800 MHz when the system is idle, which seemed to save power and might allow overclocking for "burst" applications like Solidworks. Obviously this gets back to Chris' comments with regards to the amount of time fiddling with the system vs. productive work. I hope to have some info should I be able to get a flash drive worked into my USB 3.0 port hooked up and port the darn page file into it if the numbers suggest it might be worth it.
It is important to determine the exact cause of the "slowness". Having said that, the cost of workstations is relatively low if you consider productivity problems.
I just specified, bought and built a system that just runs beautifully. No more hourglass icons and staring off into space while the machine gets done.
I am an independent contracter and it is very painful to watch the machine freeze when time is money. I spent about $3K/workstation for all the hardware including a monitor and I figure it will pay for itself in less than a month.
I used the following: i7960, 12GB DDR3, 2 Intel SSD drives (one drive for the OS and Apps., especially SolidWorks and one drive for critical working data), 1 Western Digital 1TB 7200rpm (backup), ATI FirePro V5800, 27" Samsung LCD monitor, 850W Corsair PSU etc.
$449.00 is not expensive for a workstation card, especially if you price out equivalent Nvidia cards. ATI has mad a big jump with the V5800(~$449) and V7800 (~$799). The V3800 is still considered an entry level card but that might not be what is slowing your engineers down. My experience is the processor is the biggest problem and then I look to the memory.
I just can't help but think it is worth it to avoid productivity problems. I run rather large, complex parts and assemblies. How much improvement you get is very dependent on the level of complexity that your engineers are having to deal with.
After I analyzed the current CPU, memory and GPU technology I tried to go for the highest performance I could afford because I don't want to upgrade next year. In three years I hope I can just replace the CPU and/or motherboard and be back in business. Replacing workstations every 2-3 years is annoying to say the least.
If you want a benchmark for well arranged hardware scenario look at BoxX. My understanding is this it what SolidWorks uses for their own people (could be wrong). The only thing I disagree with is BoxX's choice of Nvidia GPU's which for the performance look to be much more expensive.
I have been on SW since the early days and this is the first machine I have had that is not impeding my productivity in some way. I have pulled out my biggest, badest models/assemblies and I just don't see any delays. As far as the V5800 it spins models without any lag regardless of the SW settings.
Hope this helps,
Dave
https://forum.solidworks.com/thread/35642
The above thread answers your original posted question. and the answer? Only if you have $2,249 to spare.
Sorry, it seems like I dropped this thread & then ignored it.I have been monitoring it. (but just had 3 days of PDM enterprise training thrown into my normal work mix)
Since I have my hardware laying around, I'm going to be spec'ing out based upon what I can cobble together.
Currently, we have ~20 Engineers - all on x64 hardware, (19) on XP 64-bit SP2 and (1) on Win7 x64 Professional. I will be putting Win7 x64 Enterprise on all future workstations.
Solidworks 2009 & 2010 sprinkled about - moving to 2010 SP4 x64 as our defacto standard across the board as part of our PDM Enterprise consolidation
All workstations have Intel proc (dual-core, or i7-920's) 12GB / 16GB RAM, 7200rpm spindle HD's and most have Quadro 3700/3800's
I will be spec'ing out the following:
Base system:
2 x 40GB SSD HD in RAID0 for OS / work.
1 TB Spindle drive for backup / additional storage
12GB / 16GB RAM depending on the Proc/Chipset (preferable CAS7 or faster)
MB/CPU's:
Asus M4A89TD or Crosshair IV
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T
Asus P6TD Deluxe
Intel i7-920 (OC'd to 4.0Ghz)
Asus P6X58D-E
Intel i7-930 (OC'd to 4.0+ Ghz)
Asus P6X58D-E
Intel i7-980X Extreme Edition (Gulftown - might not OC it - frying a $1k proc has lost it's appeal )
Video Cards:
ATI Radeon HD 5800
ATI Radeon HD 4850 X2
(2) ATI FirePro V5800 - yes, trying in CrossFire Mode just for kicks.
ATI FireGL V5600
QuadroFX 4600
Nvidia 7900GTX
(2) GeForce GTX 470 (Fermi) - yes, trying in SLI Mode just for kicks.
I'm leveraging my contacts from HW Mfg made in a previous life <grin> for alot of the buildouts.
I'll using the files from SolidMuse links as well as SPECViewPerf v11 / SPECapc for SolidWorks 2007 (wasn't this rev'd somewhere?) all on x64 SW 2010 SP4. Please post if there is some other benchmark you would like to see (I'll probably throw up the Windows Experience Index for each build out just for fun)
I'll post my findings when I get done.
It would be better for you to use a single SSD drive in the system. By using RAID you will lose the SSD'd TRIM feature (keeps the drive "clean").
I suggest any of the OCZ Vertex II SSD's for read / write speed, or the Intel X-25's if ultimate R / W speed is not a concern.
Ah - but I will be Booting from .VHD & prepping out my OS that way.
I can then backup my VHD via WinPE (both to local 1TB spindle + stream over network to storage), break RAID0, run the Intel SSD Optimizer & re-create RAID0, drop the .vhd back down on it.
Utilizing a RIPL server with an auto-script to do all of this really helps. I am figuring approx every 30 days - but I'll have to monitor performance heavily for a while to see what the actual need is./
Of course, the first thing I will be doing is a disk I/O speed comparison to even see if the difference between a single SSD vs RAID0 will make this even necessary.
Message was edited by: Patrick Stewart-Fowler
Hey Folks, just to talk about the original thread, here are two reviews:
http://hothardware.com/Reviews/NVIDIA-Unleashes-Quadro-6000-and-5000-Series-Workstation-GPUs-Review/
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/nvidia-quadro-5000_6.html#sect1
In my opinion, when I am doing computer for my company, here is the list of my priorities:
-Single Threaded performance for SW
-ECC memory
-SSD
-Low Power Consumption
-Middle grade Graphics. (V4800/FX1800)
So far, I have ordered numerous of Dell workstation T3500 with W3520 and 6GB of RAM, started to play with some X3440 (our first computer not ordered at dell for office use, I am what I can call a geek in computer stuff but my boss always wanted me to focus on other things, so we always purchased Dell), the system got a little bit cheaper too which is nice and the auto turbo mechanism is fine for single threaded. I mean, we can always OC the computer for higher clock speed, but the RAM won't follow and I don't want to have my engineers yell at me when they got corrupt data... at the end, I stay with stock settings.
For home, I would just hack the drivers, which work pretty well with Ati brand lately (win7 x64 supported), look ar guru3d forum, there is a nice guy who explain all that, got a 4770 at home with realview and no graphic glitches. Sure, it can work, but if you can pay the difference and have some peace of mind, the officials are the way to go.
Different companies have different objectives in the way they build up their hardware. But if it's only SW modeling minded, I will join Anna, you need to fetch for the best single threaded performance, and the graphics depends on the scale of geometric complexity of the model you are working on. If you do some FEA, quickest multicore in some case.
Now, I am just waiting for the time they upgrade their code to take profit of CUDA/OpenCL or whaever the ATI equivalent is.
SolidWorks does not take advantage of SLI or the CUDA cores. Same goes for ATI and Crossfire.
SolidWorks is CPU bound. For increased SolidWorks performance you will want to get the best CPU you can afford.
Go with a Nvidia Quadro or ATI FirePro card that is approved for the hardware, OS and version of SolidWorks you are using.
If you do not do large assemblies or parts with a large amount of facets stick with a mid-range card. The real high end video cards will not do much for you (for the cost) unless you are working on huge datasets with a lot of facets that need to be shown and moved in the graphics window of SolidWorks.
Cheers,
Anna